[Main Page] Main Page | Recent changes | Edit this page | Page history

Printable version | #REDIRECT [[Thelemapedia:Disclaimers]] | Current revision

Not logged in
Log in | Help
 

Talk:Personalities in Thelema

(Difference between revisions)

Revision as of 23:31, 28 Sep 2004
Ash (Talk | contribs)
Revision as of 00:03, 29 Sep 2004
Isomeme (Talk | contribs)
"in" Thelema?
Line 20: Line 20:
:::I think we need some categories, or it might get unwieldy. I myself like the OTO Past Masters category and the Golden Dawn category. We could make one that is "Notible members of OTO and AA". I am also thinking about lists of people who Crowley mention promenently, but who aren't Gnostic Saints. Finally, I am thinking about adding the ancestors of Thelema, so to speak...the mystics and philosophers that influenced Thelema (but again, aren't GSs). Ideas? [[User:Ash|Ash]] :::I think we need some categories, or it might get unwieldy. I myself like the OTO Past Masters category and the Golden Dawn category. We could make one that is "Notible members of OTO and AA". I am also thinking about lists of people who Crowley mention promenently, but who aren't Gnostic Saints. Finally, I am thinking about adding the ancestors of Thelema, so to speak...the mystics and philosophers that influenced Thelema (but again, aren't GSs). Ideas? [[User:Ash|Ash]]
 +
 +::::I really think any attempt at linear categorization is doomed. Where does Theodor Reuss go? (Past Master of OTO, member of OTO, Gnostic Saint.) If it were possible to link within a page (is it?), I could see a bunch of category listings that just listed names as links, pointing to the full entries in the format I proposed above. --[[user:craig berry|isomeme]]

Revision as of 00:03, 29 Sep 2004

Do we really want to put the women into the "Scarlet women" category as distinct from past OTO and AA members? I would be far more comfortable with the latter option.

I second that. There can be a separate listing of the historical "Scarlet Women" in the Scarlet Woman article! --Paradoxosalpha 05:59, 28 Sep 2004 (EDT)

Overlap

Part of the Scarlet Woman problem that Craig notes is the issue of overlap, which is even more true of notable OTO and A.'.A.'. initiates. There's Jane Wolfe, Wilfred Smith, Jack Parsons, C.S. Jones--all in both orders, and those just off the top of my head.

"in" Thelema?

What does it mean to be "in" Thelema as specified in the title of this article? The only initiates of the original Golden Dawn order who considered themselves Thelemites were Crowley and George Cecil Jones, as far as I know.--Paradoxosalpha 06:20, 28 Sep 2004 (EDT)

These are good critiques. I can see this article's list growing quite long, so I think we need some basic categories. By all means, let's work this out and come up with logical ones that can carry new additions without inappropriately holding the current ones.
The more I think about it, the more it seems to me is that the only reasonable solution is to retitle the page simply "Personalities" (leaving "in (or near) THelema" implicit given it's a page on Thelemapedia), and on that page list everyone in alphabetical order by last name. Perhaps each name could be followed by a list of affiliations, like
Smith, Wilfred T. (OTO, AA)
--isomeme
I think we need some categories, or it might get unwieldy. I myself like the OTO Past Masters category and the Golden Dawn category. We could make one that is "Notible members of OTO and AA". I am also thinking about lists of people who Crowley mention promenently, but who aren't Gnostic Saints. Finally, I am thinking about adding the ancestors of Thelema, so to speak...the mystics and philosophers that influenced Thelema (but again, aren't GSs). Ideas? Ash
I really think any attempt at linear categorization is doomed. Where does Theodor Reuss go? (Past Master of OTO, member of OTO, Gnostic Saint.) If it were possible to link within a page (is it?), I could see a bunch of category listings that just listed names as links, pointing to the full entries in the format I proposed above. --isomeme